Doubtless, some of this attitude is colored by my belief that Judith Miller was a willing participant in the spreading of disinformation in the run-up to the Iraq War. I also suspect that Ms. Miller herself sees this contempt citation as a chance to be "washed in the blood of the lamb," as we used to sing in the Baptist Church. That is, she sees a little jail time as a way to retrieve her reputation as a journalist. Be that as it may, I think her legal claim is weak, a rare point of view among liberals, with the notable exception of Mark A.R. Kleiman [See also here & here]. I don't know much about Cooper's politics or his integrity as a journalist, but I'll assume he is acting in good faith, something I cannot easily assume about Miller. Nevertheless, his case seems even weaker than hers, since he not only spoke to sources but wrote about the Plame affair in Time.

 Kleiman argues that once a claim of privilege has been fully adjudicated, a reporter is obligated, in a society of laws, to obey a lawful court order. There is the ancillary benefit to society in reducing the use of anonymous sources by journalists. I would also reserve the right of civil disobedience for exceptional cases. I do not think the Plame affair is an exceptional case, or if it is exceptional it is because of the seriousness of the alleged crime. Journalists have a responsibility as citizens that at least in certain cases ought to override their responsibilities as journalists.

Besides, I'm looking forward to Rove being frog-marched out of the White House & into federal custody.